Life on earth is not a closed system, the energy that the sun provides is more than adequate to drive it. If you are indeed a physics major, then your professors have done you a grave disservice in their teachings.

"Increasing complexity" would also apply to anything that went from one undifferentiated cell to a many-billion cell organism with hundreds or thousands of specialised tissues and organs. You know, like plants and animals.

Your "law of entropy" seems to imply that neither plants or animals could grow, hence is disproved by observation. I hereby demote you to the rank of "physics private".

He may be in Behe's class. Behe is the author of "increasing complexity" or Irreducible Complexity. Irreducible Complexity is considered a non-scientific argument as both terms are relative and Behe won't and can't define either. "increasing complexity" is in fact a proven occurance over time with complexity still being defined only as different than before. The Elephant man was more complex than you or I, that's how valid "increasing complexity" is as a scientific premise.

Earth is not in a state of Entropy. So much for your major. Yes, I would like fries with that.

Behe is a Biology Professor with the proper credentials but he invests much of his time building strawmen for fun and profit. He even tried to redefine science and was shamed at the Dover trial for the obvious stunt it was.